Which came closer to its stated multiple, FAZ or UYG?

Over the window to Sep 30, 2026, FAZ finished 1.6 points from what its multiple implies and UYG finished 1.9 points from its own, so FAZ came closer. Neither figure predicts the next window: it depends on how much the underlying moves about.

Are FAZ and UYG levered on the same thing?

Yes. Both are levered on financials, FAZ at -3 times and UYG at +2 times the daily move.

Which one decays faster, FAZ or UYG?

Decay follows how much the underlying moves about. Over this window FAZ’s moved at 13% annualized and UYG’s at 13%, so FAZ has the rougher ride and, at the same multiple, loses more to compounding.

Can I hold FAZ or UYG for a year?

Both reset every day, so the multiple in the name applies to a single day and the daily results compound. Over a year the total is not the multiple times the year’s move, and in a market that falls and comes back it is reliably less. ETFIQ makes no recommendation either way.

Which is cheaper, FAZ or UYG?

FAZ charges 1.03% a year and UYG charges 0.94%, so UYG is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.

Share on X Download as PDF Open live

FAZ vs UYG: which held to its multiple?

Over three months against its own daily promise, FAZ finished 4.0 points over and UYG 1.5 points short. Direxion Daily Financial Bear 3X ETF and ProShares Ultra Financials.

+8.1%

FAZ returned, 3 months

−6.2%

UYG returned, 3 months

+1.6 pts

FAZ from its stated multiple

−1.9 pts

UYG from its stated multiple

FAZ · 3 months to Sep 30, 20261.6 pts ahead of its stated multiple

FAZ returned +8.1% while −3 times XLF's move would have been +6.5%

UYG · 3 months to Sep 30, 20261.9 pts short of its stated multiple

UYG returned −6.2% while 2 times XLF's move would have been −4.4%

ETFIQ Decay Resistance Score · FAZ scores higherDid it keep up with its own daily multiple, compounded day by day?

FAZ among the 125 inverse ETFs over three months

FAZ 93.6

0.4, the lowest in this set99.6, the highest

UYG among the 470 leveraged ETFs, long, over three months

UYG 86

0.1, the lowest in this set99.9, the highest

A percentile among the 125 inverse ETFs over three months. UYG is a percentile among the 470 leveraged ETFs, long, over three months, a different set, so the two marks are not on one scale. It is a position in a set, not a rating, and neither end of it is a recommendation. All leveraged ETFs ranked by it → How it is computed →

Performance, window by window

	Total return		Multiple would give		Difference
Window	FAZ	UYG	FAZ	UYG	FAZ	UYG
1 month	+25.2%	−14.3%	+21.4%	−14.3%	+3.8 pts	0.0 pts
3 months	+8.1%	−6.2%	+6.5%	−4.4%	+1.6 pts	−1.9 pts
6 months	−20.8%	+14.3%	−26.3%	+17.5%	+5.5 pts	−3.3 pts
1 year	+0.2%	−6.4%	−2.0%	+1.4%	+2.2 pts	−7.7 pts
3 years	−77.8%	+116.7%	−205.8%	+137.2%	+128.0 pts	−20.5 pts
Since launch FAZ Jan 2010 · UYG Jan 2010	−100.0%	+1068.3%	not meaningful	not meaningful	not meaningful	not meaningful

FAZ and UYG over each window. Every figure is an ETFIQ calculation with distributions reinvested. Source: ETFIQ. Open the live comparison on ETFIQ →

On the same fields

FAZ

Direxion Daily Financial Bear 3X ETF · Aims to return three times the opposite of the daily move of financials (XLF)

UYG

ProShares Ultra Financials · Aims to return twice the daily move of financials (XLF)

Issuer Direxion ProShares

Sets out to return -3x +2x

Underlying asset XLF XLF

Segment sector sector

Fund returned, 3 months or since launch +8.1% −6.2%

Underlying returned, over that window −2.2% −2.2%

What the stated multiple implies, over that window +6.5% −4.4%

Difference from stated, over that window +1.6 pts −1.9 pts

Fund returned, 1 year or since launch +0.2% −6.4%

Difference from stated, over that window +2.2 pts −7.7 pts

Underlying volatility 13% 13%

Difference over the days both have traded no shared window −1.9 pts

Expense ratio 1.03% 0.94%

Launched Jan 4, 2010 Jan 4, 2010

Net assets $96m $704m

FAZ and UYG on the same fields, as of Sep 30, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.

FAZ in plain words

Three months to Sep 30, 2026: FAZ returned +8.1% where its own daily promise gave +4.2%, 4.0 points over. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and −3 times XLF's −2.2% implies +6.5%, which makes FAZ look 1.6 points over. 2.4 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any −3 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. FAZ aims to return -3 times XLF's move each day, then resets. Over one day it does that. Over longer, the daily results compound, so the total is not -3 times the period's move: in a market that falls and comes back it is reliably less, and in a steady run it can be more. XLF moved at 13% annualized over that window. That is what decides how far the two figures separate: the same fund on a calm underlying and a violent one is a different product.

UYG in plain words

Three months to Sep 30, 2026: UYG returned −6.2% where its own daily promise gave −4.7%, 1.5 points short. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and 2 times XLF's −2.2% implies −4.4%, which makes UYG look 1.9 points short. 0.3 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any 2 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. UYG aims to return +2 times XLF's move each day, then resets. Over longer, the daily results compound, so the total is not +2 times the period's move: in a market that falls and comes back it is reliably less, and in a steady run it can be more.

Questions people ask

Which came closer to its stated multiple, FAZ or UYG?: Over the window to Sep 30, 2026, FAZ finished 1.6 points from what its multiple implies and UYG finished 1.9 points from its own, so FAZ came closer. Neither figure predicts the next window: it depends on how much the underlying moves about.
Are FAZ and UYG levered on the same thing?: Yes. Both are levered on financials, FAZ at -3 times and UYG at +2 times the daily move.
Which one decays faster, FAZ or UYG?: Decay follows how much the underlying moves about. Over this window FAZ’s moved at 13% annualized and UYG’s at 13%, so FAZ has the rougher ride and, at the same multiple, loses more to compounding.
Can I hold FAZ or UYG for a year?: Both reset every day, so the multiple in the name applies to a single day and the daily results compound. Over a year the total is not the multiple times the year’s move, and in a market that falls and comes back it is reliably less. ETFIQ makes no recommendation either way.
Which is cheaper, FAZ or UYG?: FAZ charges 1.03% a year and UYG charges 0.94%, so UYG is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.

Other comparisons

FAZ vs SEF FAZ vs SKF FAZ vs XLFX FAZ vs FAS UYG vs XLFX UYG vs SEF UYG vs SKF UYG vs FAS

XLF →FAZ on its own →UYG on its own →How every figure is computed →Standards and sources →

Where these figures came from

FAZ filings on SEC EDGAR ↗FAZ prospectus with the expense ratio (SEC) ↗Direxion website ↗UYG filings on SEC EDGAR ↗UYG prospectus with the expense ratio (SEC) ↗ProShares page for UYG ↗

ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure. It is not affiliated with any issuer, and a link is not an endorsement. A comparison is not a recommendation.

Cite this page

ETFIQ, FAZ against UYG, data as of Sep 30, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/faz-vs-uyg

Open data

Free to use with attribution. Every figure is calculated from a named public source; the method is at etfiq.com/methodology.